Gobs of gay marriage, DOMA, Prop 8 news

As you can imagine, there are an insane number of stories out there about the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and to dismiss the Proposition 8 case (which means Prop 8 is struck down and gay marriage will be legal again in California).

Rather than write a gazillion posts, I thought it might be useful to put a lot of them in one post. So here goes:

The running of the interns (Buzzfeed). Just click, and make sure you turn on the soundtrack at the top of the story before scrolling.

Surprise marriage proposal in Tennessee following the Supreme Court decision (Out and About Nashville) – the fun starts about a minute in when the woman speaking realizes her partner is holding a ring box:

Los Angeles resident Brad Bigelow, 58, had a more immediate memory. This week, Bigelow will mark one year since his longtime partner died. He fought back tears talking about the loss.

“My partner of 32 years died a year ago this Friday,” Bigelow said. “This was our dream and he never got to see it.”

Bigelow was at the rally with Bert Champagne, a friend who also lost his partner eight years ago. For Champagne, the day was an opportunity to celebrate that the next generation of LGBT people and their supporters will no longer be second-class citizens in the eyes of the federal government.

“Today is a tragic day for marriage and our nation. The Supreme Court has dealt a profound injustice to the American people by striking down in part the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The Court got it wrong. The federal government ought to respect the truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, even where states fail to do so. The preservation of liberty and justice requires that all laws, federal and state, respect the truth, including the truth about marriage. It is also unfortunate that the Court did not take the opportunity to uphold California’s Proposition 8 but instead decided not to rule on the matter. The common good of all, especially our children, depends upon a society that strives to uphold the truth of marriage. Now is the time to redouble our efforts in witness to this truth. These decisions are part of a public debate of great consequence. The future of marriage and the well-being of our society hang in the balance.

The Best or worst lines from Scalia’s angry dissent (Mother Jones). He really is an ass:

“[T]o defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions.”

Then there’s this from Scalia:

“Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better.”

Yeah, thanks for your concern. I’ll take our victory the way it came, thank you very much.

What’s remarkable is not the celebrations, the couples lining up on the courthouse steps in San Francisco, the raucous celebrations in New York City, or the tears of joy on the steps of the Supreme Court.

What’s remarkable for Americans over the age of 30, is the relative quiet among the opponents of same-sex marriage. For its supporters, Wendesday was a long time coming. But in the scope of history, America has had a remarkably short change of heart on the issue.

While the court didn’t rule on Prop 8 because of standing, this language does suggest that the Court is prepared to strike down other state laws banning gay marriage as in violation of the equal protection clause. And gay rights advocates predict a wave of new lawsuits against such laws as a result.

“This will be a powerful weapon for attacking restrictions on marriage around the country,” Theodore Boutrous, who helped argue the case for the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case, tells me. “In future lawsuits challenging marriage restrictions in states, litigants will use the language in today’s decision.”

Indeed, in his dissent, Scalia all but admits all of this to be the case:

By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition. Henceforth those challengers will lead with this court that there is “no legitimate purpose” served by such a law, and will claim the traditional definition has “the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure” the “personhood and dignity” of same-sex couples.

Scalia meant this as a negative, but he’s absolutely right. There is still plenty of work to do, but today’s decision will, in fact, give a powerful new weapon to those who will now set about getting state laws banning gay marriage struck down as illegitimate and an affront to the “personhood and dignity of same-sex couples.”

Rush Limbaugh ignored the various obstacles the LGBT community continues to face, from employment discrimination to the ability to use public accommodations, when he declared that “all the gay issues are behind us” in wake of Wednesday’s Supreme Court rulings on marriage equality.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Windsor v. United States on June 26 struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denied married same-sex couples the benefits and protections afforded to married couples under federal law.

Limbaugh responded to the news by stating, “With all of today’s Supreme Court decisions on all of the gay issues, all the fatwas, we had DOMA, we had Proposition 8, so now all the gay issues are behind us … So now the gays are free to turn out and support Republicans now.”

Later in his show, Limbaugh claimed, “For all of human history, marriage was that between a man and a woman. And everything was hunky-doory. Everything was fine … Then all of a sudden one day, homosexuals decided that it wasn’t fair. That they couldn’t get married. So they began to agitate and stir things up.”

“The path is less clear” — until the Internal Revenue Service issues guidance — for couples who were married in a state where gay marriage is legal, but live in a state that doesn’t recognize it, says Sainz, because the IRS currently uses the filer’s state of residence as a guide on marriage, he says. Washington, D.C., and 13 states — accounting for about 30% of the U.S. population — recognize gay marriage.

Another big question, says Annette Nellen, a professor of accounting and taxation at San Jose State University, is that the Internal Revenue Code refers at least 30 times to couples as a “husband and a wife.” She wonders if the IRS will clarify that or if Congress will get involved.

Well that language is now unconstitutional and struck down by the Supreme Court, I’d argue, so if the administration can’t offers those benefits to gays, they can’t offer them to anyone, I’d argue, as the language is now struck.

Alex D’Addario at Salon considers what’s next for Gay Inc. after marriage. Of course, what’s next is getting marriage in every state. And getting ENDA, the ENDA executive order, and fighting bullying, and HIV, and getting some openly cabinet secretaries, and Supreme Court justices, and Senators…

Peter Hamby at CNN writes about how the Supreme Court’s DOMA and Prop 8 rulings complicate life for Republicans:

Meanwhile, the court’s rulings Wednesday were met with something less than unbridled enthusiasm by the GOP political class.

“My interest in weighing in on this topic approaches zero,” said one veteran Republican working on a 2014 Senate race when asked to opine on the cases.

The reason is clear enough: Republican tacticians understand that winning modern races often means surviving the obstacle course of a conservative-dominated primary before having to appeal to general election voters who, nationally, view same-sex marriage as a non-issue.

Republican leaders in Washington expressed dismay at the ruling, but seemed eager to wash their hands of a polarizing national issue that, thanks to the court’s opinion on Proposition 8, will now be considered in state capitals instead of the corridors of Capitol Hill.

John AravosisFollow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in New York City, and is the cofounder of TimeToResign.com. Bio, article archive.

Share This Post

That’s not true. Section 2 does nothing in practice. The courts have never found (at least not in the 20th century) that laws are fully portable from one state to another. States often recognize marriages from other states out of courtesy, but they certainly don’t have to. And they don’t always have. They are free to ignore laws that conflict with their own so-called “public policy”. Only court judgments (like adoptions or divorces) are fully portable.

It’s an absurd, anachronistic and utterly impractical system, but it’s common legal doctrine.

Also, in the absence of any specific guidance, the federal government often defaults to the state of celebration, so even people in NC will get many federal benefits. The exception or some laws like Social Security and VA benefits that contain explicit clauses about only recognizing a marriage that is valid in the state of residence.

Stev84

The Roman Empire fell after it overextended itself militarily, went into a prolonged economic recession and then made Christianity the state religion in an attempt to unify people. Sound familiar?

LOL! Yes! I don’t know what that means, but it sounds fantastic! More similes for robertson etc! More!

markpkessinger

It was a hugely important ruling, and a major step in the right direction, but we need to temper our enthusiasm just a bit. Yesterday’s ruling declared ONLY Section 3 of DOMA — the section dealing with recognition of same-sex marriages by agencies of the federal government — to be unconstitutional. But Section 2 — the section that permits states that do not recognize same-sex marriage to refuse to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages legally performed in other states — still stands. Moreover, if a same-sex couple who was legally married in one state later moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages, the federal government will not override that later state’s refusal to recognize, and thus the federal government will not recognize the marriage either. What that means with regard to the case at issue in DOMA is that if the plaintiff, Edith Windsor, and her partner had been residents of a state like, say, North Carolina when her partner died, Ms. Windstor still would not be entitled to the spousal exemption from federal estate taxes, which was the point of her lawsuit. We are still a long, long way from marriage equality, folks, even at the federal level.

cole3244

what a sweet moment that lady getting a ring, i think i’m as happy for her as she is for herself and her partner.

Thom Allen

Scalia? RUN? Have you looked at him? He couldn’t run to the Thanksgiving buffet.

Thom Allen

There are people who even believe that Clarence Thomas is alive . . .

nicho

They will end up beating a spot on the sidewalk where there used to be a dead horse.

mamazboy

Several of the Supremes are serious case studies in sociopathy, and could provide an interesting project for researchers. It’s really disturbing to see Alito, Scalidiot, Roberts, and Thomas getting the final say on so much that’s important to us, though obviously this time, thanks to Kennedy, they finally did the right thing.

pappyvet

Yes, the People have won a great victory and we should rejoice. But lets not put up our armour too quickly or relax without vigilance,or accept that this will in any way change much in the minds of the bigots. It will not and there will be a multitude of battles to fight,I fear. Instead I propose that we give thanks to those who came before us. The ones who went to jail and who were beaten and murdered for the sake of freedom and decent treatment can perhaps rest a bit easier now. But keep your powder dry.

mamazboy

Good point, Nicho! This will have a much-desired “chilling effect” on the homophobes who continue to flog what can now be considered a dying, if not dead, horse.

mamazboy

Nicho, I’m with you, but I keep seeing, even in mainstream and occasionally progressive venues, how “smart,” and “witty,” and “brilliant” this asshole is. I’d love to see the counter-narrative, aka reality, click in with more people.

nicho

I retired that notion a long time ago. In fact, I’m not sure I ever entertained that notion.

mamazboy

Can we please retire once and for all the notion that Scalia is “brilliant.” He’s an illogical, NOT bright idiot who can’t reason. He just dresses up his banalities and lack of insight with glibness.

nicho

Are you referring to Benny Hill or Fannie Foxe? Actually, either would fit. I would love to see Scalia running around in the reflecting pool being chased by the Park Police with the Benny Hill music in the background.

Justice Anton Trollia never fails to leave an effervescent slug trail on the history of injustice in this country. I pray for the day when karma dumps a massive wad of salt on his bitter, demented corpus.

I’m voting your remark down, nicho; not because you disagree with what UncleBucky said, but because you just implanted a noxious mental-image in my brain that’ll take me all day to evict. Have a nice day.

What I’m worried about is that while the igits keep trying to prove that denying human rights isn’t discrimination in court, the court will keep issuing “stays” (ie, leaving everyone in limbo).

nicho

Yeah, but no Circuit Court justice is going to take the chance of sending something up when the Supremes have already told him what the answer is — and in no uncertain terms. That just makes him look bad and is a really shitty career move. It’s like when the teacher gives you the answers to the test and you don’t use them.

Number Six

Maybe he’s gotten worse or maybe becoming as powerful as he is (in his mind, at least) has destroyed that little lock we all keep on our innermost thoughts. That’s the thing about power — it lets the reality show through.

Number Six

The thing about Scalia is, he’s an ass. And the thing about an ass is, it can’t keep its braying mouth shut. If it knows something, it MUST brag about it.

For once, we can all be thankful to that ass, Scalia.

Indigo

It sounds a little messy in New Mexico but you’re ahead of the Florida curve because the Florida legislature already outlawed same-sex marriages two years ago and there’s no visible energy working to undo that. Not yet, anyhow.

Number Six

I hope you’re correct — a lot of lawyers have made whole careers out of less ambiguity than that. It all depends on what the meaning of “is” is, if you know what I mean.

UncleBucky

Ahhh Hahahaha, you got me! OUCH!

woodroad34

We’re at the very beginning of some Federal protections with marriage and possibly employment protections and with the rejection of portions of the voting rights act (because “there isn’t any racial discrimination any longer”)…how soon after would that type of warped thinking apply to gays?

nicho

Well, I’ll disagree — both mold and bacteria can have good uses. Robertson and Limbaugh are like having a festering boil on your balls.

nicho

I think that is a big point. The court specifically did away with Sec. 3 because that was what they were asked to rule on. But the opinion in an all-out assault on anti-marriage equality laws in general and DOMA specifically. Anyone who wants to challenge an anti-equality law at the Circuit level merely has to staple a copy of the ruling to the filing. It says over and over and over — DOMA is unconstitutional – the statute is unconstitutional – DOMA is unconstitutional. There is no ambiguity. I don’t see how any state laws can endure in the face of that.

Becca, I think it’s all over except for the shouting. State Constitutions limiting marriage “to a man and a woman” cannot stand legally given the language in Anthony Kennedy’s majority decision on DOMA. They will need to be challenged, but the challenges will prevail. Equal protection of the law is equal protection of the law.

jomicur

“Tony Scalia isn’t so much conservative as mentally ill” There’s a difference?!

Wow, that’s some pathetic reporting from the Sentinel. Same sex marriage is very much not yet legal in California — it’s a minimum of 25 days away. And yeah — the rest of the media is full of reports that even couples in anti-gay states will enjoy at least some of the federal benefits previoiusly denied us.

Meanwhile, the DOMA overturn and how it may affect us here in NM is very much in the local news.

I’m looking forward to seeing how that “less slutty” thing works out for Fox News. And I’m also looking forward to learning how GOP politicians go about not saying anything stupid. (Is that even possible?) Meanwhile, the always faithful Orlando Sentinel reports that Prop 8 was dismissed and gay marriage is now legal in California (which is very far away from Florida). Oh, and also, buried in that article was a mention of DOMA being partially overturned for some reason or other but apparently has nothing to do with nice people who live in Florid’oh. Sigh.

Indigo

He’s a shrewd one, that Scalia, and knows where the loopholes and short cuts are. Nice of him to do the research for us.

kingstonbears

Slightly off thread, but maybe not. A bit of news from north of the border. It’s Pride Week here with the major celebration being in Toronto. We celebrated here in Kingston a couple of weeks ago. Anyway, YouTube asked its corporate groups to do a shout out for Pride.

The link will take you to one done by my sister-in-law who is the Executive Producer of Coral TV. I’ll let the rest speak for itself. Yes, over 30 years.

The schadenfreude has been nigh overwhelming these last 24 hours, and I fear a permanent state of intoxication from drinking in all the homophobes’ tears of despair, horror and sadness.

I know — there will likely be a backlash in the days and weeks to come. And I remain unsatisfied that the Supremes didn’t find for a general constitutional right for marriage for all Americans, no matter where we live. But for now, this is a welcome respite.

Legalistic Argle Bargle – definition – legal reasoning that gets in the way of using your position on the SCOTUS to impose your own religious dogma on an American citizenry that increasingly does not share your belief system.

I wonder if Pat Robertson has ever read St, Augustine’s book, City of God. Ironic he should mention the Roman Empire because Augustine found himself in the position of pushing back against Roman politicians of his time who claimed that Christianity resulted in the weakening of the fighting spirit and ‘toughness’ necessary to maintaining the empire. There were those in the Roman Empire who blamed the spread of Christianity for its fall. Ironic.

BlueIdaho

Does anyone know how many gay law clerks work for the conservative justices? Is this just a job for them and/or they as disgusted as we are by the shit that Scalia and Thomas write?

pappyvet

That is a shame my friend because the roundups give a much broader range of insight.

UncleBucky

Robertson and Limbaugh are like rust on steel, mold on wood and bacteria on sick poeple.

pappyvet

“For all of human history, marriage was that between a man and a woman. And everything was hunky-doory. Everything was fine” Limbaugh

Well, no it wasn’t.

Oh it was wonderful for people like Limbaugh but it was terrible for the women. The last state to remove the marital rape exemption was North Carolina and that didn’t happen until 1993 ! Women were routinely beaten because even to psychiatrists, they were asking for it. To men like Limbaugh,this was heaven. They had complete control no matter what kind of dog they were. How wonderful!

Gays have been around since the dawn of human history and were even accepted in some societies,get used to it !

Jim Olson

What has been seen cannot be unseen, even by the eye of the mind. Please pass the brain bleach.

nicho

It is kind of disgusting, but it’s like a gruesome auto accident. You don’t want to look at it, but you can’t help yourself.

Kinda sucks because these roundups never get the traffic of individual stories, but it seemed silly to only pick a few to write about today.

dcinsider

Thanks for that mental image.

nicho

I think what’s become clear over the last week or so is that Tony Scalia isn’t so much conservative as mentally ill. I think he’s only a couple of synapse failures away from being found by the Park Police while he’s frolicking nude in the reflecting pool at 3 a.m.

woodroad34

My concern now (and I’m hoping I don’t give the Children of the Corn…I mean, GOP any ideas) is that people like poor-excuse-for-a-Judge-Scalia will now say that Gays are no longer biased against and try to dismantle any protections we now have like they did with the voting rights act. Seriously, he does not deal in facts, just fears and emotion. His guts stink and he’s immensely unprofessional. But then what do you expect from someone who was appointed by a President in the throes of Alzheimer’s? Worrying about Satan destroying the world….try looking at the hard right and how we’ve gone into economic ruin, moral decay and fear-induced living. The cancer of America’s political system.

We are in the battle of our lives

We must fight back, and we CAN win this. But it will take hard work and time. I am already making preparations for a wide-ranging campaign to fight Trump's Cabinet appointees and supreme court nominations. As part of that effort, when my lease is up in NYC, I will be moving back to Washington, DC, to take the fight directly to Donald Trump.

Won't you please support my work with a generous donation? And then, follow me on Twitter and Facebook, where I do a lot of micro-blogging in addition to here on AMERICAblog.